Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) had arrested eight Apple
Daily reporters and five police personnel for allegedly leaking police information
for bribes. On 30 November night the ICAC raided the headquarters of Apple Daily
to seize the documents, reporters' notebooks and computer files by two search
warrants. However, the Apple Daily claimed that these two warrants were invalid
and did not authorize the seizure of the documents. All items have been sealed
under a court order pending the outcome of the newspaper's challenge to the
warrants.

Chief Judge Chan's granting of the interim injunction followed on the heels
of a decision made by Court of First Instance Justice Thomas Gall shortly before
the court closed yesterday. The lower court judge refused an application by
Apple Daily that he declared the ICAC officers unlawfully seized documents from
the company's premises on Monday.

On December 2, two Pang Chau teenagers, Kan Kwok-hung, 27 and Samson Kan Kwok-shing,
26 jointly ran into the police station in order to argue with police to stop
bullying the three boys, who were suspected to be involved into the criminal
destroy case. The Kan's brothers were arrested by the police and were charged
of assaulting police and misbehavior in public place. Their arrested triggered
a brief "siege" of the police station on the Island by about 100 residents.
The brothers' parents claimed that they clearly saw the sons being allegedly
assaulted. According to SCMP dated December 2, Mr. Kan, the children's brother,
claimed said "My sons were lying on the floor when they were kicked on
the jaw by the police." Moreover, Peng Chau Rural Affairs Committee vice-president
Wong Hoi-yue said that he saw both brothers with leg injuries at the police
officer.

However, two brothers were accused of assaulting police officers inside Peng
Chau police station. The prosecutor claimed that the defendants arrived at the
station and began to act in a disorderly manner by damaging distilled water
and assaulted some police officers inside the charge office. Both defendants
were released on bail of $10,000 but are subject to curfew order between 11
am to 6 p.m.

Abolition of Urban Council and Regional Council (December 3, 1999)

A Bill of abolishing the two municipal councils was passed in December 2,
1999. At first, the DAB had said that it would oppose the abolition plan. However,
in the second reading, the party's chairman changed its idea and support and
said that his party would support the Bill. In a crucial voting moment, Mr.
Wong absented and it resulted that the amendments passing through 31 to 27.
The Democratic party commented that the DAB had bowed to the Government pressure
in allowing Mr. Wong to leave the chamber and the vice-chairman of Democratic
Party Mr. Albert HO Chun-yan said that it was not a coincidence. It was doubtful
that the abolition of the municipal councils would weaken the political participation
of the civil citizens.

Issue of Right of Abode put in the Court of Final Appeal (December 3, 1999)
(Article 23, Article 24)

On December 3, the Court of Final Appeal ruled that Beijing had the ultimate
power to interpret the Basic Law and hence its is lawful for the National of
People Congress Standing Committee to re-interpret abode laws. Its power was
originated from Article 67 (4) of the Chinese constitution and contained in
the Article 158 (1) of the Basic Law. According to South China Morning Post
dated on December 3, Chief Justice Andrew Li Kwok-nang said the judges agreed
power held by the Standing Committee was unrestricted. As a result, it restored
a government scheme requiring migrants claiming the right of abode to apply
on the mainland for certificates of entitlement and to be subject to a quota
system for entry into Hong Kong. An exit approval from the mainland authorities
is required. Moreover, the ruling denied the right of abode to migrants who
were born before their parents became permanent residents. In addition, only
people who had declared their right of abode before January 29, 1999 would receive
investigation for application and the government claimed that the population
was around 3,500 to 4,000 and it is not duty-bound to consider applications
on the basis of humanitarian grounds. The effect of re-interpretation is backdated
to July 1, 1997.

Although the Government welcomed to the judgement, it aroused a hot debate
in the society. Claimants still insisted that the Standing Committee had no
power to make the interpretation.

The Dissolution of the Sino-British Joint Liaison Group (December 8, 1999)

The Sino-British Joint Liaison Group would dissolute on December 31, 1999 after
working for 14 years. It was formed under the Sino-British Joint Declaration
since November 1985 and initiated the first meeting in London. It mainly worked
as a mediator and liaison group between both countries to ensure that the handover
of Hong Kong was successful and stable. That group was also a channel to express
opinion on the development of civil and political rights in Hong Kong.

A Hong Kong SAR resident, Mr. Wu Man, who was abducted by five or six gunman
in Bangkok on June 14 before being flown back to Public Security Bureau at Guangzhou
where he had been detained for five months. However, the Secretary for Security
commented that the deportation of a suspected member was legal. She explained
that it was because Mr. Wu was defined as a Chinese citizen under mainland law,
the authority sent him back to the mainland, as China was regarded as his "place
of origin". She stressed that the deportation would not be used as a form
of extradition but it showed the highly degree of cooperation of combating crimes
between Thai and Chinese authorities. Moreover, taking deportation or not uis
a decision made by foreign government, the SAR government could not interfere
in it. She also said Mr. Wu agreed to be sent back to China.,

On the contrary, the legislator claimed that Mr. Wu should be sent back to
Hong Kong first and then transferred to the mainland under the principle of
"One country, Two systems" in the Basic Law. Furthermore, in a column
at Mingpao News, legislator Margaret Ng Hoi-yee commented that deportation was
totally different from extradition by citing a law case in 1996. She said that
the Secretary for Security mixed up the concepts of deportation and extradition.
Concerning that case, Mr. Wu was illegally extradited. Moreover, even though
it was a case of deportation, under international law, deportation meant that
he should be sent to the specified country/region, where he stayed before he
entered Thailand, i.e. Hong Kong.

Judgement of the Case of Desecration of National and SAR Flag by the Final
Appeal Court (16 December, 1999) (Article 19)

Two HK citizens, Mr. Ng Kung-siu, 25 and Mr. Lee Kin-yun, 19, were convicted
of desecrating the national and SAR flags during a demonstration in May 1998.
The Court of Appeal overturned their convictions in March 1999. However, the
Government was dissatisfied with the appeal court and put the case in the Court
of Final Appeal. On 15 December 1999, the Final Appeal Court declared that it
was a crime to desecrate the national or regional flags.

According to South China Morning Post dated on December 16, Chief Justice
Andrew Li Kwok-nang stated that the legislation, which carries a maximum sentence
of three years' imprisonment, imposed a permissible restriction on the freedom
of expression. He emphasized that the symbolic role-played by the flags in ensuring
implementation of the "one country, two systems" concept and maintaining
national unity since the handover. "Protection of the national flag and
the regional flag from desecration, having regard to their unique symbolism,
will play an important part in the attainment of these goals. Criminalization
of flag desecration is a justifiable restriction on the guaranteed right to
the freedom of expression."

The flag-case activist Ng Kung-siu criticized that "the verdict has shown
that our freedom of expression has rolled back since the handover." In
addition, professor Mr. Raymond Wacks from the University of Hong Kong said
the court had been driven to its decision by the constitutional realities it
faced.

The Director of Society for Community Organization's Mr. Ho Hei-wah warned that
the ruling could hamper freedom of speech. "The CFA verdict has given a
very clear direction to the people of Hong Kong regarding the way they should
respect the national and SAR flags. But defacing a flag is a form of expression
of ideas." He said.

The admission of Talent Scheme, which began on December 17, allowed 2000 talented
people from the mainland and overseas to work and to stay in Hong Kong. According
to the Immigration Department, the applicants should first have a job with a
Hong Kong company and the company submitted an application. The talented people
should at least obtain a doctorate degree on certain specialty. However, such
migration policy provides preference to the talented and seems to discriminate
against people who are less talented.

Flag Case Activist Arrested (December, 20 1999) (Article 19)

An activist and member of the April 5th Action Group, Mr. Lee Kin-yun, who
involved in a court case for burning the national flag in Hong Kong was arrested
in Macau yesterday for allegedly conspiring to burn the Portuguese flag. Mr.
Antonio Lou, a member of the Chinese Liberal Party who was arrested at the same
time. Lee was detained for four hours at the Public Security Police Headquarter.
Lee claimed that he had been under police surveillance for a week and his phone
was tapped. Jeremy Lei Man-chao, executive committee member of the Union for
Democracy Development in Macau, stated the police action was "a very serious
infringement of human rights."

The Chairman of four advisory committees to the ICAC announced the figure,
which showed a 61% jump with 300 civil servants facing punishment in 1999 compared
with 186 last year. It called for tougher anti-corruption measures within government
departments and recommended for disciplinary action. Police topped the ICAC-recommended
list with over a hundred officers and Housing department followed. Moreover,
there were 55 court cases involving last year and six common problems could
be found: a lack of alertness about accepting advantages, abuse of public office,
perverting the course of justice, heavy indebtedness and accepting unauthorized
loans and making false overtime claims, breach of rules and order. However,
the Civil Service Bureau played down the figures and said the service was "clean
and honest".

The non-indigenous villagers of Po Toi O Village to cry for their voting rights
and put the case for judicial review on March, 1999. The court ruled that they
had such rights as the traditional election method exploited their rights of
political participation. However, the Home Affairs Department and Hang Hau Rural
Committee dissatisfied towards the ruling and appealed it in High Court.

Mr. Daniel Fung, Senior Counsel, for the Department of Justice, had told the
court the rules for the elections were devised by the villagers, and that the
government's role was to decide whether to approve the result. The district
office did not involve in the election and the election result was declared
unlawful because voters were excluded by sexual discrimination. He encouraged
that judges not to interfere with the village elections and left it to the Government
gradually introduced fairer procedures.

However, Mr. Justice Simon Mayo said that it would not be helpful if the government
only made objections after the election was completed. According to South China
Morning Post dated on December 22, Chief Judge Patrick Chan Siu-oi said, "the
villagers at least had the impression that the district office was very much
in it."

Besides, Mr. Dykes, for non-indigenous villagers, seeked to uphold two court
rulings on March that declared election procedures unlawful because of sex discrimination
and the failure to allow non-indigenous villagers to take part. He argued that
the indigenous villagers could not be regarded as an ethnic minority as many
of them lived in the city. Besides, Mr. Michael Lunn SC, for the Equal Opportunities
Commission, argued that rules for the elections breached sex discrimination
laws. The ruling has not announced yet.

Two core members of the Hong Kong Buddhist Association, director Au Kit-ming
and vice-chairman Lai Sze-neun, issued separated strongly worded statements
warning against the danger posed to society by "cults". One even alleged
that the SAR Government was conniving the group of Falun Gong in the name of
religious freedom. Mr. Au did not direct the name of the sect and claimed that
the activities were becoming more prevalent in Hong Kong and unhealthy for society.

The Chief Executive of the Buddhist Association claimed that it was just a
personal comment but claimed that they had received many consultations on clarifying
between Buddhist and Falun Gong. The Association worried that people would have
confusion. However, it was speculated that it had a strong political implication,
as one of the members of the Association, Sik Chi-wai, was the local deputy
of NPC.

The survey conducted by the Hong Kong Policy Research Institute interviewed
more than 1,000 people found that public confidence in press freedom was down
to14.5%. It decreased from 107.7 in January to 92.1 in December. It showed that
the press freedom would be harmed by the proposal of establishing statutory
Press Council.

Buyers under unknown on piling problems (December 23, 1999) (General)

Potential buyers of new Home Ownership Scheme units were not allowed to get
more information before buying flats because Housing Department refused to disclose
the information of Tin Fu Court in Tin Shui Wai, in which defective pilings
were found in these buildings. The assistant director of the Housing Department
said that all building were safe and fault had been picked up during a routine
inspection. However, the consumers were not protected during the purchasing
procedures because details were not fully released. After one day, the officials
released details on settlement in all public housing sites under construction.
The Housing authority member Mr. Wong Kwun said that he believed such U-turn
was to avoid adversely affecting sales of Tin Shui Wan units.

A High Court judge, Mr. Justice Frank Stock, threw out a legal challenge to
the scrapping of the municipal councils. He ruled that the Municipal Services
(reorganization) Bill did not contravene the Basic Law or the International
Covenant of Civil and Political Rights. Also, there was a "fundamental
flaw" in the argument of the applicants as neither council had an elected
member.

Benjamin Yu SC, the government's barrister argued that the bill could not have
taken correctly because the two provisional council members had been "appointed"
by the Chief Executive after the handover. Besides, barrister Johannes Chan,
for the applicants, said that the bill deprived the public of the right to take
part into public affairs and urged the court to take into account the Beijing-established
Preparatory Committee's opinions on terms of councils. But the judge said that
the Committee did no more than make proposals to the Chief Executive in establishing
those organizations and he would rule by common law approach.

Complaints against police officers rose about 8% from 251 in October to 272
last month. The number of alleged assaults by police officers increased from
71 cases in October to 87 in November. Moreover, a total of 2845 complaints
were filed for the first 11 months, while it was just 2697 for the same period
last year. The situation of police brutality became worse.

Justice Frank Stock, a High Court judge, ruled yesterday that all Chinese citizens
born in Hong Kong have unconditional right of abode in accordance with Article
24(2)(1) of the Basic Law, which stated that the permanent residents of the
HKSAR shall be Chinese citizens born in Hong Kong. Moreover, the immigration
provision mandating that one of the parents be settled in the SAR before they
could acquire the status was unconstitutional. The judge claimed that a approved
report prepared by a Central Government Mandatory Committee lending credence
to the immigration law requirement did not have binding effect on Hong Kong's
courts.

The government argued that mere birth on the SAR was not enough for claiming
abode right and the claimant should have at least one of the parents settled
in the SAR. However, the judge claimed that he did not find the re-interpretation
made by NPCSC on Article 24 related to Article 24(2)(1). Also, the judge ruled
that the intention of the drafters of Basic Law was not preventing Chinese people
whom born in Hong Kong from obtaining the right of abode.

However, National People Congress (NPC) local deputy Mr. Ma Lik questioned
the ruling and suggested the Chief Executive to request another re-interpretation
from the NPCSC. He argued that the "Chinese citizens born in Hong Kong"
was referring to those born to citizens, who resided in Hong Kong legally, in
accordance with the resolution endorsed by the Preparatory Committee in 1996.

On the other hand, the Democratic Party chairman and barrister Mr. Martin
Lee Chu-ming welcomed the judge and said that it was correct. Besides, the pro-Beijing
DAB vice chairman, Mr. Ip Kwok-him urged the government to appeal to prevent
a mass influx of pregnant mainlanders. At that moment, the government decided
to appeal.

Six-year Mainland term for SAR Man (December 27 1999) (Article 9, 10)

A Hong Kong businessman, Hermann Li Hiu-ming had been sentenced to six years
in a labor rehabilitation camp after being found guilty of embezzlement by a
mainland court. Li and two of his firm's shareholders launched a joint venture
with a plant in 1995 to produce hi-tech television parts. Li was accused by
his mainland business partner of having embezzled from a state-run production
plant in Jinhua, Zhejiang. This factory board was chaired by Jinhua's Vice-Mayor,
Mr. Lu Fulu. However, Li stated the US$70000 was part of his reward in accordance
with his contract. He was arrested on 17 November 1998. He was being detained
as a debt hostage in the detention center and his family was asked to pay US$3.5
million for his release. Li's wife, Li Lai Yuk-ling said the trail was unfair
because his lawyers were barred from accessing crucial evidence presented to
the court. Li and his family decided to appeal to a higher court.

Hong Kong Falun Gong followers worried that the long jail terms handed down
in Beijing on Sunday were a warning to them. Four mainland Falun Gong leaders
were sentenced by Beijing Number 1 Intermediate People's Court on Sunday to
between seven and 18 years' imprisonment. The pro-Chinese newspaper, Ta Kung
Pao said SAR practitioners of the sect should "wake up". Earlier this
month, Foreign Ministry Commissioner Mr. Ma Yuzhen said that Falun Gong must
not use Hong Kong as a base for subversion, while Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa
said that the sect must not act against the interests of China or Hong Kong.
Mr. Kan Hung-chung, a spokesman of Falun Gong in Hong Kong, said members would
continue their normal activities within the law.

One Hong Kong biggest Buddhist group, Hong Kong Buddhist Association, condemned
Falun Gong activities amid indications that Beijing may be quietly mobilizing
its allies here to quell the sect. However, several human rights groups worried
the long jail terms in Beijing were a warning to Falun Gong in Hong Kong. The
Hong Kong based Information Center of Human Rights and Democratic Movement in
China and Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor feared that the government would very
soon end its policy of tolerance towards local members of Falun Gong sect.